Cognitive development in deaf children: the interface of language and perception in neuropsychology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What does the sense of hearing contribute to human development? To answer the question, we must ask what the sense of hearing gives the child. Hearing gives the child the acoustic correlates of the physical world: approaching footsteps, dog barks, car horns, and the pitter-patter of rain. Hearing also allows the child to revel in the patterned complexity of a Beethoven symphony or a mother’s lullaby. Children who are born deaf clearly miss a great deal. However, hearing conveys much more to the growing child than the acoustics of the physical world. Hearing is the sensory modality through which children perceive speech — the universe of talk that ties individuals, families and societies together. Children born with bilateral hearing losses that are severe (70–89 dB loss) or profound (>90 dB loss) are referred to as deaf. They cannot hear conversational speech (approximately 60 dB) and consequently do not spontaneously learn to talk. Indeed, not talking at the right age is one of the first signs that a child cannot hear. The primary consequence of childhood deafness is that it blocks the development of spoken language — both the acts of speaking and comprehending. This fact leads us to ask what spoken language contributes to the child’s cognitive development. Be-
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it